Every scene serves to illustrate Frith's primary conceit... borrowed from John Cage... that music is all around us at all times if one is open to hearing it. For instance, it's in the sound of power tools, garbage trucks, and the raking of the stones in a Japanese rock garden. Frith sometimes incorporates these sounds directly into his work, but more often, he simply does his best to recreates them on his guitar, violin and other instruments.
4 Reviews
A whimsical and provocative documentary
lbcsrw29 April 2002
This film is a snapshot of the life of Fred Frith, an English-born multi-instrumentalist, composer, and improvisor. It finds him in Europe, Japan, and the US, working and playing with a variety of avant garde artists.
There is no narrative, or narrator. The images blend with his music, and visa versa, creating a narrative all their own. His performances, widely varied, reveal a light hearted intensity. In one scene, he uses his violin to 'sing' with seagulls and, in another, he conducts a quartet. Most of all, it shows him as a human being whose being is infused with music. It pours out of him in all its varied forms, and he welcomes it all.
Just prior to its west coast screening, I saw an elegant older woman at one of Mr Frith's solo performances. She seemed completely out of place, and so I asked her why she was there. Turns out that she was Sheila Benson, LA Times Film critic. She said that she'd seen the film on VHS, and felt so intrigued that she had to come and see him in person.
There is no narrative, or narrator. The images blend with his music, and visa versa, creating a narrative all their own. His performances, widely varied, reveal a light hearted intensity. In one scene, he uses his violin to 'sing' with seagulls and, in another, he conducts a quartet. Most of all, it shows him as a human being whose being is infused with music. It pours out of him in all its varied forms, and he welcomes it all.
Just prior to its west coast screening, I saw an elegant older woman at one of Mr Frith's solo performances. She seemed completely out of place, and so I asked her why she was there. Turns out that she was Sheila Benson, LA Times Film critic. She said that she'd seen the film on VHS, and felt so intrigued that she had to come and see him in person.
An exceptionally good film
lukas-zielinski31 March 2011
I frequently listen to jazz, but not in the way that I follow artists or study the sub-genres. I have never heard of the people in the movie and I don't remember the names, even though I just saw the film.
I even found it very unpleasant and difficult to get into in the beginning, but at some point it started to work for me. I am not sure if my reaction was what the filmmakers intended or if it is similar for other people.
Late in the film the musician talks about how he doesn't expect to become rich or famous. However he frequently hears from listeners how his music made them see things in a different light.
I think this is exactly what this film does.
It feels like a mixture of careful planning, (very) deliberate pacing and sheer serendipity. Its lightness might contrast with its heaviness because of careful planning and obsessive execution. Maybe they just got lucky.
Whatever it is, it is quickly summarized: The camera films scenes in interchanging locations, almost flickering between the US, Japan and Germany. It shows people going about their daily business and a couple of musicians performing their art on the street, at home, on stage whilst also experimenting freely with sound.
The magic must be in the interruptions. It doesn't seem to agree with how daily life works, but at the same time it appreciates it in a very intimate way. It doesn't allow the viewer to ignore even the most mundane detail, but urges him to question it.
This comes at a price and requires collaboration. Like a challenge that is accepted, but not accepted lightly. Energy is limited, but the sacrifice is rewarded.
However, I am not sure everyone will agree.
I felt it difficult to watch in the beginning because of that deal. Because I value time. I usually don't enjoy most movies because they take too much and give very little. (Of course there are exceptions, even in the mainstream.)
What about people with plenty of time? Those that feel that time is cheap? Will they like it? And what about the rest? Is it a good thing to look at things from new angles? What if they don't like the conclusion of their new ideas? Wouldn't this movie, being so utterly pleasurable as it is, be part of mainstream culture, if everyone did what it does? What about the music? Should we all start playing more? With instruments, other things? What if we all did?
Whatever the answer (or the question), this is an exceptionally good film and I'm rating it with an easy 10. For all the difficulty it may cause.
I even found it very unpleasant and difficult to get into in the beginning, but at some point it started to work for me. I am not sure if my reaction was what the filmmakers intended or if it is similar for other people.
Late in the film the musician talks about how he doesn't expect to become rich or famous. However he frequently hears from listeners how his music made them see things in a different light.
I think this is exactly what this film does.
It feels like a mixture of careful planning, (very) deliberate pacing and sheer serendipity. Its lightness might contrast with its heaviness because of careful planning and obsessive execution. Maybe they just got lucky.
Whatever it is, it is quickly summarized: The camera films scenes in interchanging locations, almost flickering between the US, Japan and Germany. It shows people going about their daily business and a couple of musicians performing their art on the street, at home, on stage whilst also experimenting freely with sound.
The magic must be in the interruptions. It doesn't seem to agree with how daily life works, but at the same time it appreciates it in a very intimate way. It doesn't allow the viewer to ignore even the most mundane detail, but urges him to question it.
This comes at a price and requires collaboration. Like a challenge that is accepted, but not accepted lightly. Energy is limited, but the sacrifice is rewarded.
However, I am not sure everyone will agree.
I felt it difficult to watch in the beginning because of that deal. Because I value time. I usually don't enjoy most movies because they take too much and give very little. (Of course there are exceptions, even in the mainstream.)
What about people with plenty of time? Those that feel that time is cheap? Will they like it? And what about the rest? Is it a good thing to look at things from new angles? What if they don't like the conclusion of their new ideas? Wouldn't this movie, being so utterly pleasurable as it is, be part of mainstream culture, if everyone did what it does? What about the music? Should we all start playing more? With instruments, other things? What if we all did?
Whatever the answer (or the question), this is an exceptionally good film and I'm rating it with an easy 10. For all the difficulty it may cause.
avant garde for the conservative
ginkoale17 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Despite its praise from the editors of Chaier du Cinema, Step Across The Border presents a rather poor account of guitarist, Fred Frith. Although Frith himself is a talented individual, this film hesitates to acknowledge his more ambitious projects, such as Naked City, but instead portrays him in a conservative light, simply as a guitarist who has collaborated with musicians in 3 or 4 different countries.
What disappoints me the most about this film are the sequences in Japan, where shots of anonymous and random Japanese are edited between shots of Frith, playing his music. What is this film attempting to say at these points? That the Japanese are somehow representative of the avant garde? Indeed, Frith has collaborated with musicians from Japan, like Yamataka Eye. Unfortunately, rather than simply showing this, Step Across The Border seems to glorify the Japanese and their nation, as something interesting and weird that can be associated with Frith's music.
What disappoints me the most about this film are the sequences in Japan, where shots of anonymous and random Japanese are edited between shots of Frith, playing his music. What is this film attempting to say at these points? That the Japanese are somehow representative of the avant garde? Indeed, Frith has collaborated with musicians from Japan, like Yamataka Eye. Unfortunately, rather than simply showing this, Step Across The Border seems to glorify the Japanese and their nation, as something interesting and weird that can be associated with Frith's music.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
